tokfandomcom-20200215-history
Militarization of police
team members, some armed with assault rifles, prepare for an exercise}} (LAPD) SWAT officers in tactical gear at a parade in 2009}} Militarization of police refers to the use of and by s. This includes the use of s, s, s, s, s, s, and (SWAT) teams. The of law enforcement is also associated with -style information gathering aimed at the public and s, and a more aggressive style of . Criminal justice professor Peter Kraska has defined militarization of police as "the process whereby police increasingly draw from, and pattern themselves around, the tenets of and the military model." Observers have noted the militarizing of the policing of s. Since the 1970s, have fired at protesters using guns with s or s. , which was developed by the for in 1919, was widely used against protesters in the 2000s. The use of tear gas in fare is prohibited by various international treaties that most states have signed; however, its law enforcement or use for or non- situations is permitted. Concerns about the militarization of police have been raised by both ends of the political spectrum in the , with both the right-of-center/libertarian and the voicing criticisms of the practice. The has spoken out in favor of equipping law enforcement officers with military equipment, on the grounds that it increases the officers' safety and enables them to protect members of the public and other s (e.g., s and personnel). However, a 2017 study showed that police forces which received military equipment were more likely to have violent encounters with the public, regardless of local crime rates. Canada in full at the }} Canadian legal expert Michael Spratt wrote, "... there's no question that Canadian police sometimes look more like post-apocalyptic military mercenaries than protectors of the peace. Our police services have been acquiring more and more military toys — a dangerous trend that's gotten little in the way of critical analysis in the mainstream media." Growing numbers of police agencies have acquired armored vehicles in recent years. In 2010 the Ottawa Police Service bought a armored personnel carrier for $340,000, which has "half-inch-thick military steel armoured bodywork, .50 caliber-rated ballistic glass, blast-resistant floors, custom-designed gun ports and ... a roof turret." The in Toronto in 2010 showed that the militarization of protest policing is not only occurring in the United States. Police in Toronto used a sound cannon, or (LRAD) -- a that was developed for use in conflicts in the Middle East, as well as barricades, pre-emptive arrests and riot units. According to Kevin Walby, an assistant professor of criminal justice at the , "the more interesting aspect of the militarization of the police is actually on the strategy side"; police are "increasingly training with military-style tacticians, especially when it comes to situations like and, increasingly, ." On June 3, 2015 it was reported that "RCMP officers have started openly carrying submachine guns on as part of a visible increase to Parliament Hill security following last " in 2014. Conservative senator , a former RCMP officer and a former Ottawa police chief states that "...some RCMP officers guarding Parliament Hill against potential terrorist attacks should be armed with rifles similar to those carried by Canadian troops in Afghanistan ," the "...more powerful Colt is popular with police tactical teams and Canadian and other NATO alliance troops." White argues that the C8 carbines would give officers a much longer shooting range than the short-barreled . "The RCMP is issuing more than 2,200 C8 carbines to its officers ," but the RCMP has not indicated whether the C8s will be issued to Parliament Hill officers. The use of surplus armored vehicles for use by the RCMP and other police forces throughout the country are challenged by lawyers and academics since they can easily send the wrong message to the public. According to Michael Spratt, an Ottawa-based criminal lawyer, the funds used to acquire the vehicles is better used for crime prevention activities. Brazil In 2013 "...Brazil saw countrywide demonstrations protesting a lack of basic services while the country was spending billions on the and the . The unprepared and overreacting police forces responded in a way that shocked the largely middle-class protesters. The police, using "non-lethal" weapons like pepper spray and rubber bullets while dressed from head to toe in ninja-like full battle gear, indiscriminately arrested both violent " " demonstrators, known for their confrontational tactics and anarchist views, along with non-violent protestors marching peacefully." As a result, "...calls for de-militarization of the police—from social movements, non-governmental organizations, and even segments of the police itself—became widespread and remain one of the legacies of the World Cup." The Brazilian "...Military Police today, while not officially a wing of the Armed Forces, remains an institution with a strict military hierarchy, training that retains a military ideology, and practices that frequently resemble occupying forces conquering enemy territories." The units that responded to the protests were Shock Police, units specialized in . The Military Police is an ancillary and reserve force of the Army, under the General Inspectorate of Military Police, being that a part of Land Operations Command. But, in time of peace, the state governor act as commander-in-chief of the Police and Firefighting Corps, according to the , article 144, 6th paragraph, where it is said that the "Military Police and Firefighter Corps, ancillary and reserve forces of the Army, subordinate themselves, with the Civil Police, to the state and Federal District governors." Colombia "Since 1999, an eight-billion-dollar programme in has seen "the mass deployment of military troops and militarized police forces to both interdict illegal drugs and counter left-wing guerrilla groups". This assistance "promotes militarization to address organized crime". Due to these U.S. policies, "civilian forces ... have increasingly received military training, leading to concerns over human rights violations and excessive use of force, as well as a lack of knowledge over how to deal with local protests – concerns startlingly similar to those now coming out of Ferguson, Missouri." Germany in blue-silver varnish for the German as displayed at 2016}} In 2016, the German police introduced a "new special unit, BFE+", which is designed to "counter terror attacks." Criminologist Rafael Behr states that the new "mainly serves as a psychological reassurance for the public", serving as a "symbolic" effort and a functional effort. The functional aspect is that with the BFE+, the government can use armed forces with military weapons inside Germany, an act that is "currently banned by the German constitution". The 250 person BFE+ will be added to the existing unit. Behr states that the BFE+ will be able to "launch large-scale manhunts", using an "end of the policing spectrum" which "borders on war-like or military action." Mexico new national police force, the Gendarmería, is partially staffed with active duty soldiers, part of a longstanding trend towards militarization of the country's . Indonesia }} The is an n militarized (Paramilitary) which are often deployed for Riot control, SWAT operations, anti-terror, domestic guerrilla warfare, domestic civil hostage rescue, search and rescue, and armed conflict management especially in areas with domestic conflict, such as in and . It usually conducts joint operations with the . United States History 19th Century Following the (1865–1877) in the aftermath of the (1861–1865), passed the 1878 , in response to the allegation of abuse under of the former by members of the during Reconstruction. Still in force, the law prohibits the and the (as amended in 1956) for being used as except when authorized by the under certain circumstances; similar limitation also applies to the and the by policy. The Act does not apply to the and s while under the authority of their respective nor the , which is both an and a agency and is not under authority of the (which was formed in 1947 out of the ). After the law was passed, it allowed and to regain control of their affairs, with their police departments typically equipped with , , and , which were suitable for law enforcement purposes. 20th Century for United States forces}} Throughout the 20th century, the United States has faced large and heavily armed , in which law enforcement officers were clearly outperformed. In the 1920s during the and in the early 1930s during the , criminal syndicates and individual bank robbers such as and were frequently armed with s and . The (FBI), as well as police departments in cities such as and , began deploying automatic weapons, including the Thompson submachine gun, and armored cars in the 1920s and 1930s. in 1936.}} , a veteran of the and the first Superintendent of the , was an early advocate of law enforcement officers wearing their weapons exposed on the outside of their uniforms. During , gunmen from criminal gangs in the United States began wearing s made from thick layers of cotton padding and cloth. These early vests could absorb the impact of handgun rounds such as , , , , , and traveling at speeds of up to . To overcome these vests, law enforcement agents such as the began using the newer and more powerful , and later the cartridge. Experts believes that police militarization was escalated in the 1950s and 1960s, an era in which s were common in many U.S. cities.needed Some believe that the seeming success of officers armed with military-style weapons and deployed to curtail the 1965 , a six-day race riot sparked by conflicts with the (LAPD) that killed 34 people, gave way to the trend of arming and equipping law enforcement officers with battlefield weapons. Joy Rohde, a professor at the 's , has published research indicating that "militarization is a mindset ... is a tendency to see the world through the lens of national security, a tendency to exaggerate existing threats." Rohde traces "the origins of modern militarized policing" to the -era paranoia, and the idea that domestic civil rights activists were similar to foreign enemies, as manifested in activities such as the CIA's . Things have changed over the last 100 years and due to the rise of acts of terrorism and the easy access to high-powered weapons; special weapons and tactics teams have been implemented and are being utilized across the nation. The 1960s to 1990s, encounters with the sophisticated weapons of narcotics trafficking groups such as the and street gangs such as the , with organized, violent left-wing protesters at such events as the in and the 1999 in , with such as the 1965 Watts riots in and the in led law enforcement to reconsider their standard s. As well, law enforcement experience with arsonists such as (ELF), with mass s and/or s such as the 1984 in and the between eight FBI agents and two serial in (in which the agents were out-gunned by the robbers) and with used by the , , and (the "Unabomber"), highlighted the inadequacy of many law enforcement agencies' weapons and tactics. Researchers David N. Falcone, Edward L. Wells, and Ralph A. Weisheit describe a historical separation of police models between small towns and larger cities, which tended to function differently with separate hierarchical systems supporting each. The militarization of both rural and urban law enforcement has been attributed to the United States' involvement in wars during the 20th century, and to increasingly frequent encounters with violent protesters and criminals with automatic weapons, explosives, and body armor, although some attribute the militarization to the more recent campaigns known as the and the . Historian argues that cultural change during the Great Depression encouraged the militarization of law enforcement, whereas Harwood argues that the creation of SWAT teams and tactical units within law enforcement during the 1960s began such trend. armored vehicle}} The 1981 allows the U.S. military to cooperate with domestic and foreign law enforcement agencies. Operations in support of law enforcement include assistance in counter-drug operations, assistance for civil disturbances, special security operations, , explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), and similar activities. Constitutional and statutory restrictions and corresponding directives and regulations limit the type of support provided in this area. This allows the U.S. military to give law enforcement agencies access to and . The legislation was promoted during the in the context of the , and is considered a part of a general trend towards the militarization of police. The Act is cited in the 1992 essay as having set a precedent that the author, a officer, considered dangerous. The 1997 had a profound effect on law enforcement agencies. Local patrol officers at the time were typically armed with their standard issue or pistols, with some having a shotgun available in their cars. The North Hollywood bank robbers carried fully automatic -style weapons with high capacity s and ammunition capable of penetrating vehicles and police Kevlar vests. With these weapons, two bank robbers fired approximately 1,100 rounds at officers and civilians before being killed. The robbers wore which successfully protected them from bullets and shotgun pellets fired by the responding patrolmen. Police noted that the service pistols carried by the first responding officers had insufficient range and relatively poor accuracy, although a SWAT team eventually arrived with sufficient firepower. The ineffectiveness of the standard police patrol pistols and shotguns in penetrating the robbers' body armor led to a trend in the United States toward arming selected police officers, not just SWAT teams, with heavier firepower such as semi-automatic type rifles. SWAT teams, whose close quarters battle weaponry usually consisted of s that fired pistol cartridges such as the , began supplementing them with AR-15 type rifles and carbines. Seven months after the incident, the Department of Defense gave 600 surplus to the LAPD, which were issued to each patrol sergeant; LAPD patrol vehicles now carry AR-15s as standard issue, with bullet-resistant plating in their doors as well. As a result of this incident, the LAPD authorized its officers to carry .45 ACP caliber semiautomatic pistols as duty sidearms, specifically the . Prior to 1997, only LAPD SWAT officers were authorized to carry .45 ACP caliber pistols, specifically the Model 1911A1 .45 ACP semiautomatic pistol. rifle during a training exercise}} The was created by the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1997 as part of the (DLA) to transfer excess military equipment to law enforcement agencies. , 8,000 local law enforcement agencies participate in the reutilization program that has transferred $5.1 billion in military hardware from the to local American law enforcement agencies since 1997. Police departments have obtained surplus aircraft, , tactical armored vehicles, weapons, including grenade launchers, and . 21st Century Under the , law enforcement officers must receive written permission from a court of law, or otherwise qualified , to lawfully search and seize evidence while investigating criminal activity. Following the , the 2001 gave law enforcement officers permission to search a home or business without the owner's or the occupant's consent or knowledge, amongst other provisions, if terrorist activities were suspected. The Act was criticized for its perceived violation of civil liberties and has generated a great deal of controversy since its enactment. In , the court found that increased monitoring of suspects caused by the Patriot Act directly put the suspects' in jeopardy. For a time, the Act allowed for agents to undertake "sneak and peek" searches. Critics such as the ACLU strongly criticized the law for violating the Fourth Amendment. On May 18, 2015, President announced limits on the types of military equipment which can be transferred to police departments and the implementation of training programs to assure the appropriate use of other items. The military can no longer transfer some weapons, such as grenade launchers, weaponized vehicles, and bayonets to police. Obama stated that "We've seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like it's an as opposed to a force that's part of the community that's protecting them and serving them, ... So we're going to prohibit equipment made for the battlefield that is not appropriate for local police departments." In response to Obama's announcement, the United States' largest police union, the , reacted negatively, pledging to push back against the new restrictions, and accusing the administration of politicizing officers' safety. The executive director of the FOP, James Pasco, stated that his group "...(would) be at (their) most aggressive in asserting the need for officer safety and officer rights in any police changes that are to be effected", and objected to a requirement that would require police departments to obtain permission from city governments to acquire certain equipment, including riot batons, helmets and shields, through federal programs. Pasco stated "We need to only look back to (the location of the 2015 protests following the ) to see what happens when officers are sent out ill-equipped in a disturbance situation ... ; Because you don't like the optics (of militarization), you can't send police officers out to be hurt or killed." In July 2016, the Obama Administration announced that it would revisit the 2015 ban on some types of military equipment for police forces, and begin a process of case-by-case review. On August 28, 2017 U.S. Attorney General announced the lifting of restrictions on the transfer of military equipment to law enforcement agencies. Sessions said during his announcement that the administration would not "put superficial concerns above public safety". War on Police Some prominent Americans have argued that police militarization is required to respond to an alleged "war on police" that exists in the U.S.: Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick stated "There's A War On Cops", New York Police Chief Bratton warned of a "war on cops" and similar statements have been made by , , and . calls these claims "fact-free "; he states that "...2015 is on pace to see 35 felonious killings of police officers. If that pace holds, this year would end with the second lowest number of murdered cops in decades." as well as "...not only are fewer people killing police officers, fewer people are trying to harm them." Notable incidents engulfed in flames during the in , on April 19, 1993}} MOVE bombing On Monday, May 13, 1985, Philadelphia police attempted to clear a building occupied by activists and execute arrest warrants. This led to an armed standoff with police, who lobbed canisters at the building. The police said that MOVE members fired at them; a gunfight with and s ensued. Commissioner Sambor ordered that the compound be bombed. From a Pennsylvania State Police helicopter, Philadelphia Police Lt. Frank Powell proceeded to drop two one-pound bombs (which the police referred to as "entry devices") made of FBI-supplied , a substitute, targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house. The resulting explosions ignited a fire which spread and eventually destroyed approximately 65 nearby houses. Eleven people (John Africa, five other adults, and five children aged 7 to 13) died in the resulting fire, and more than 250 people in the neighborhood were left homeless. Ramona Africa, one of the two survivors, said that police fired at those trying to escape. Ruby Ridge In 1992, there was a deadly confrontation and a 12-day at in between , his family and his friend Kevin Harris, and agents of the (USMS) and (FBI). USMS and FBI agents were armed with M16s and sniper rifles, and they used an armored personnel carrier. It resulted in the deaths of two Weaver's son Sammy, his wife Vicki, and Deputy U.S. Marshal William Francis Degan. At the subsequent federal criminal trial of Weaver and Harris, Weaver's attorney made accusations of "criminal wrongdoing" against every agency involved in the incident: the FBI, USMS, the (BATFE), and the (USAO) for Idaho. At the completion of the trial, the 's formed a Ruby Ridge Task Force to investigate Spence's charges. The 1994 Task Force report was released in redacted form by Lexis Counsel Connect and raised questions about the conduct and policy of all the agencies. Public outcry over Ruby Ridge led to the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Government Information holding 14 days of hearings and issuing a report calling for reforms in to prevent a repeat of Ruby Ridge and to restore public confidence in federal law enforcement. Branch Davidian siege In 1993, FBI and BATFE agents used armored vehicles and tanks and attack helicopters during the in , . The FBI's arms included (12.7 mm) rifles and s, which are based on an chassis. The FBI also launched CS grenade fire from s and fired two military M651 rounds at the Branch Davidian site. 40mm munitions recovered by the at Waco included dozens of plastic Ferret Model SGA-400 Liquid CS rounds, two metal M651 military pyrotechnic tear gas rounds, two metal NICO Pyrotechnik Sound & Flash grenades, and parachute illumination flares. The Army Tech Manual for the M651 warns that it can penetrate 3/4" plywood at 200 meters and the "projectile may explode upon target impact." Other events 2005–2009 In 2005, the (MSP) began entering the names and personal information of death penalty opponents and anti-war protesters into a database used to track terrorists. In the aftermath of in in 2005, employees of the private security firm patrolled the city with automatic weapons. "When asked what authority they were operating under," journalist Jeremy Scahill reported, "one guy said, 'We're on contract with the Department of Homeland Security.'" Local news station mentioned reports of police officers claiming to have looters. On August 25, 2008, the (DPD) were accused of making mass, indiscriminate arrests of almost 100 protesters at the Democratic National Convention. In 2011, the city of agreed to pay a $200,000 settlement and to improve its crowd control training and policies. 2010–2014 In February 2010, the (MPD) raided the apartment of Rickia Russell, breaching the door and throwing in a , as part of a search for drugs. At the time, Russell was eating dinner with her boyfriend and the exploding grenade gave her burns to her head and calves. No drugs were found in Russell's apartment and the Minneapolis City Council agreed to pay $1 million in damages. In January 2011, Rogelio Serrato in , , died of after a flashbang grenade launched by the SWAT team of the Greenfield Police Department (GPD) ignited a fire in his home. In May 2011, the Sheriff's department killed Marine and Iraq war veteran , when they entered his home while serving a search warrant related to a marijuana smuggling investigation. They fired 71 shots into his home, while his wife and 4-year-old child were inside, and found no drugs nor anything illegal. The departments involved paid a $3.4 million settlement. Referring to the 2011 protests in , Glen Greenwald wrote, "The police response was so excessive, and so clearly modeled after battlefield tactics, that there was no doubt that deterring domestic is one of the primary aims of police militarization." The (OPD) used excessive force while breaking up demonstrations in 2011. Several protesters successfully sued the city of for their injuries; Scott Olsen was severely injured after being hit in the head with a police projectile and was awarded $4.5 million. The city paid $1.17 million to a group of protesters, and $645,000 to Kayvan Sabeghi, who was clubbed by police. with a provides at the Ferguson protest regarding the .}} On May 28, 2014, a SWAT team looking for drugs in a home threw a into the house. The grenade landed in the playpen of a 19-month-old baby boy, and the detonation severely burned and mutilated the baby's face. In late 2014, concerns about the militarization of police arose after the occurred on , 2014, in , a of }}. The display of military gear by area police agencies dealing with the protests received significant criticism from the media and politicians. There were concerns over insensitivity, tactics and a militarized response. In recent years, the use of military equipment and tactics for community policing and for public order policing has become more widespread. Lawmakers have begun to discuss the topic. Concerns and responses Community policing The drift toward militarization concerns police officers and police policy analysts themselves. U.S. grew out of the of the which emphasizes the relationship between the police and the community they serve. Police academy education patterned after a military boot camp, military-type s and black color by itself may produce aggression, as do the missions named wars on crime, on drugs, and on terrorism. In a 2013 piece in the newsletter of the DOJ's (COPS), COPS Senior Policy Analyst Karl Bickel warned that police militarization could seriously impair . Bickel wrote that accelerating militarization was likely to alienate police relationship with the community, and pointed to a variety of factors that contribute to militarization, including the growth of SWAT; the increase prevalence of dark-colored military-style battle dress uniforms for patrol officers (which research suggests has a psychological effect of increasing aggression in the wearer), and "warrior-like" stress training in policing training, which fosters an "us versus them" approach. Use of force A report by looking at data from the early 2010s investigated the mindset of "guardian" versus "warrior" by calculating the rate of complaints for excessive against police officers who had served in the military versus police officers in general. It found higher rates for veterans in Boston (28% vs. 17%) and Miami (14% vs. 11%), but found no difference for . A national survey in August 2016 by the found police officers who had served in the military were more likely to have fired their weapon while doing police work (32% vs. 26%). team with automatic weapons, helmets and }} Viewpoints The ACLU has stated that local police use these "wartime weapons in everyday policing, especially to fight the wasteful and failed drug war, which has unfairly targeted people of color." Travis Irvine from The Huffington Post referred to how "local police forces now roll tank-like vehicles through our streets." Dave Pruett from The Huffington Post raised concerns about "Military s, still in camouflage and mounted with s, in the hands of municipal police and SWAT teams of police in full , bristling with automatic weapons." Former "...Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper published an essay arguing that the current epidemic of is a reflection of the militarization ... of our urban police forces, the result of years of the "war on drugs" and the "war on terror." Senator has proposed a demilitarization of U.S. police departments, stating that "The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action." Chuck Canterbury, the president of the Fraternal Order of Police, argued that the equipment received from the federal government had been properly de-militarized, and that it was being used to protect civilians from . He further stated that the use of the equipment by law enforcement was necessary to protect civilians, since have taken place across the United States, even in small towns. Responding to claims that law enforcement officers were being given tanks, Canterbury argued that the vehicles being used by law enforcement were not armed, and that they were being used across the United States to protect other officers. On March 23, 2015, a Department of Justice investigation into by the in the period from 2007-2013 found that the way officers are trained may be a contributing factor to excessive use of deadly force. The report found that a) many officers have the mistaken assumption that being "in fear of their life" is justification for the use of deadly force, but fear should not be a factor - it's a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary to avoid death or serious injury; b) instruction about policies on the use of force is confusing; c) most training scenarios end in some type of use of force and officers are rarely, if ever, trained how to resolve confrontations peacefully; d) 80% of suspects shot by police were black - black suspects were also more than twice as likely to be shot due to a "threat perception failure"; and e) no consistent procedure was in place for shooting investigations, no audio or video recordings of officer interviews were being made, and officers are often interviewed months after the incidents. In a report released in June 2015, alleged that the United States does not comply with the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Intelligence-gathering and surveillance In a January 2017 report criminal justice policy analyst Adam Bates argues that in the United States, "an increasingly militarized domestic police force" is characterized by " that has not been limited to weapons and tactics. What the War on Drugs has done for police militarization, the War on Terror is now doing for police intelligence gathering, and the privacy of millions of Americans is at risk." The has raised concerns about military involvement in surveillance of peaceful protesters. The ACLU pointed, for example, to (DOD) issuance of (TALON) depicting and other anti-war groups as "terrorist threats." The ACLU also raised concerns about military involvement in " s." Civil liberties The federal of 1878 forbids the U.S. military from conducting domestic law enforcement activities, embodying "the traditional American principle of separating civilian and military authority." There have been exceptions made, however: in 1981, Congress enacted legislation allowing military involvement in drug interdiction at U.S. borders, and eight years later "designated the Department of Defense as the 'single lead agency' in drug interdiction efforts." In the late 1990s, following the , there were proposals to further limit the act to allow military participation in law enforcement activities in chemical/biological weapon and terrorism cases. These anti-terrorism proposals were criticized by some commentators on the basis that they were a threat to civil liberties. Writers such as officer critiqued proposals to use the military for internal security, on the basis that "No one should suffer the illusion that military forces could ever execute the laws with the same sensitivity to civil liberties as regular police forces." Dunlap argued that "the central imperatives of military service" was "destroying targets and undermining enemy command and control"—a skill that did not necessary carry over into intelligence-gathering and investigation. Under this view, "a successful policization of the armed forces may well render it incapable of defeating authentic external military threats." The accelerating militarization of regular law enforcement during the and post- , however, prompted some commentators to express alarm at the blurring of the distinction between civil and military functions, and the potential to erode constraints on governmental power in times of perceived crisis. A 2010 paper published in the journal examined "role convergence, that is, evidence that significant segments of police operations in the United States have taken on military characteristics; and evidence indicating that many U.S. military initiatives have taken on policing characteristics." It concluded that "for individual citizens and for society as a whole, at least one aspect of role convergence—the militarization of the police—is potentially troublesome. If this convergence results in the police adopting not only military-type tactics and procedures but also military attitudes and orientations, the convergence may seriously threaten traditional civil rights and liberties." A 2014 report by the , War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing, concluded that "American policing has become unnecessarily and dangerously militarized ...," citing an increase in the use in unnecessarily aggressive SWAT raids, "tactics designed for the battlefield"; and military equipment such as s, s, and s, as well as a lack of transparency and oversight. Writers such as and Randal John Meyer have argued that militarization leads to "extreme constitutional violations." SWAT teams and military-style raid tactics Peter Kraska, a criminal justice professor at , found that the prevalence of SWAT teams, among police agencies serving populations of at least 50,000 people, doubled from the mid-1980s to the late-1990s, rising to 89% of police agencies by the end of this time period. Among smaller police agencies (covering areas with between 25,000 and 50,000 people), the proportion with SWAT teams rose from 20% in the mid-198-s to 80% in the mid-2000s. Kraska states that: "When people refer to the militarization of police, it's not in a pejorative or judgmental sense.Contemporary police agencies have moved significantly along a continuum culturally, materially, operationally, while using a model. All of those are clear indications that they're moving away from a civilian model of policing." A 2014 ACLU report, War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing, concluded that "American policing has become unnecessarily and dangerously militarized ..." The report examined 818 uses of SWAT teams by more than 20 law enforcement agencies in 11 U.S. states from the period of July 2010 to October 2013. Military-style tactics used by such teams include nighttime raids, use of s, use of s, overwhelming displays of force, and the wearing of helmets and masks. The use of SWAT teams became especially common for searches. The ACLU study found that 62% of SWAT deployments were for drug raids, and that 79% involved raids on private homes; the study found that only "7% fell into those categories for which the technique was originally intended, such as hostage situations or barricades." In some cases, civilians, including infants, were killed or injured due to police use of force in military style raids. In other cases, residents of affected neighborhoods reported experiencing psychological trauma as a result of militaristic law-enforcement tactics. The use of force and military-style equipment during such raids prompted criticism, particularly from such as , who wrote on the topic in his book Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces. The (CPD) have been accused of operating a secret " " in Homan Square where suspects were held without being booked and registered and where they could not be found by their attorneys or families. Suspects were allegedly shackled and beaten. Federal efforts to curb militarization From 1997 to 2016, the (DOJ) has gone to court to challenge policing practices in more than 24 cities in order to protect the civil rights of the public. The made a broad push police reform. In 2015, the Task Force for 21st Century Policing recommended restricting federal transfers of military surplus equipment, such as s and armored vehicles, from the to law enforcement agencies via the . President Obama implemented the recommendations by in Executive Order 13688, in what observers saw as a bid to shift police sway from "away from creeping militarization and toward community policing." The signaled a dramatic policy shift, with pledging during the campaign to reinstate the entire 1033 program. In 2017, the Trump administration announced it will reinstate the program. Types of teams and weapons SWAT teams SWAT team conducts a rifle drill.}} (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams are law enforcement units in the United States that use specialized or military equipment and tactics. First created in the 1960s for or violent confrontations with , the number and usage of SWAT teams increased in the 1980s and 1990s during the , and in the aftermath of the . In the United States today, SWAT teams are deployed 50,000-80,000 times every year, 80% of the time in order to serve search warrants, most often for narcotics. SWAT teams are increasingly equipped with military-type hardware and are trained to deploy against threats of , for , and in situations beyond the capabilities of ordinary law enforcement, sometimes deemed "high-risk." Other countries have developed their own police units (PPU)s that are also described as or compared to SWAT police forces. SWAT units are often equipped with specialized firearms including s, s, , s, s, and stun grenades. They have specialized equipment including heavy body armor, ballistic shields, entry tools, armored vehicles, advanced night vision optics, and motion detectors for covertly determining the positions of hostages or hostage takers, inside enclosed structures. The increased use of SWAT teams is a hallmark of increased police militarization. The Cato Institute's wrote that during the 1970s, there were about 300 SWAT raids a year and as of 2005 there were 40,000 a year. SWAT teams being used for gambling crackdowns and serving a search warrant are routine in some places, like Fairfax, VA."There has been a more than 1400% increase in the amount of SWAT deployments between 1980 and 2000, according to estimates ... by professor Peter Kraska." Balko states that in 2007, "...a Dallas SWAT team raided a Veterans organization's ... charity poker games. In 2010, a team of heavily armed Orange County, Florida, sheriff's deputies raided several barbershops, holding barbers and customers at gunpoint while they turned the shops inside out. Of the 37 people arrested, 34 were taken in for "barbering without a license." The Orlando barbershop raids were subsequently challenged in court, and in 2014, the ruled that it violated " Fourth Amendment rights" for the government to conduct "a run-of-the-mill administrative inspection as though it is a criminal raid." The ACLU has stated that "... heavily armed SWAT teams are raiding people's homes in the middle of the night, often just to search for drugs", causing people to "needlessly die during these raids," in which neighborhoods are turned into "warzones". Snipers s, commonly called police snipers, and military snipers differ in many ways, including their areas of operation and tactics. A police sharpshooter is part of a police operation and usually takes part in relatively short missions. forces typically deploy such sharpshooters in scenarios. This differs from a military sniper, who operates as part of a larger army, engaged in warfare. Sometimes as part of a SWAT team, police snipers are deployed alongside negotiators and an assault team trained for . As policemen, they are trained to shoot only as a last resort, when there is a direct threat to life; the police sharpshooter has a well-known rule: "Be prepared to take a life to save a life." Police snipers typically operate at much shorter ranges than military snipers, generally under and sometimes even less than . Both types of snipers do make difficult shots under pressure, and often perform one-shot kills. sniper on the roof of the }} Police units that are unequipped for tactical operations may rely on a specialized SWAT team, which may have a dedicated sniper. Police snipers placed in vantage points, such as high buildings, can provide security for events. In one high-profile incident, Mike Plumb, a SWAT sniper in , prevented a suicide by shooting a revolver out of the individual's hand, leaving him unharmed. marksman uses an M107 from a helicopter.}} The need for specialized training for police sharpshooters was made apparent in 1972 during the when the German police could not deploy specialized personnel or equipment during the standoff at the airport in the closing phase of the crisis, and consequently all of the i hostages were killed. While the German army did have snipers in 1972, the use of snipers of the German army in the scenario was impossible due to the 's explicit prohibition of the use of the military in domestic matters. This lack of police trained snipers was later addressed with the founding of the specialized police counter-terrorist unit , which subsequently became a widely copied model for a police special forces unit. In September 2015, a San Bernardino Sheriff's Department sniper shot a suspect in a fast-moving car from a helicopter. The suspect leapt from his car and died on the side of the road, but his vehicle continued forward, striking another vehicle and critically injuring three civilians. Protest policing officers in full riot gear during the }} Observers have noted the militarizing of the policing of s. are who are organized, deployed, trained or equipped to confront s, or s. Riot police may be regular police who act in the role of riot police in particular situations or they may be separate units organized within or in parallel to regular police forces. Riot police are used in a variety of different situations and for a variety of different purposes. They may be employed to as their name suggests, to disperse or , to maintain or discourage ity, or to protect people or property. In some cases, riot police may function as a tool of by violently breaking up protests and suppressing or . at seated protesters during the }} Riot police often use special equipment termed to help protect themselves and attack protesters or rioters. Riot gear typically includes , , and s. Many riot police teams also deploy specialized weapons, such as , , rifles that fire or s, s, and s (sound cannons). The police tactics used during the 2001 serve as an example of the approaches used by North American riot police. During the protest, riot police fired canisters, , and , dispersing large groupings of protesters both violent and peaceful, including teach-ins and teams of medics providing first aid to other protesters. Other tactical interventions aimed at arresting various perceived movement leaders. Allegedly, "plastic bullets were being used increasingly riot police, and from guns with laser sights so at night people could often see that the cops were intentionally aiming for heads or groins." Military weapons calibre M107 sniper rifle is almost identical to the pictured here. | footer_background = | footer_align = | footer = }} Some U.S. SWAT teams have adopted the carbine. Some U.S. police departments are using the , which will replace the M16 as the main U.S. Army combat . "After the in 1997, the Department of Defense gave 600 surplus s to LAPD, which were issued to each patrol sergeant. Various U.S. SWAT teams are armed with the , a . U.S. law enforcement agencies such as the , the (NYPD), and the (PBP) use the . Police use the M82 to breach barriers, because the large-calibre round it fires will penetrate most commercial brick walls and . It is an designated as a Special Application Sniper Rifle and designed for use against military equipment (materiel), rather than against other s (" "). It is used by many armies around the world both in regular forces and in special forces units. As it uses a .50 BMG round, this has led to some debates in the U.S. armed forces about the legality of using such a large anti-materiel rifle round against a human. There have been persistent reports that some U.S. military personnel believe that the use of .50 BMG in a direct antipersonnel role is prohibited by the . However, Maj. Hays Parks states that "No treaty language exists (either generally or specifically) to support a limitation on use of .50 BMG against personnel, and its widespread, longstanding use in this role suggests that such antipersonnel employment is the customary practice of nations." In October 2011 police officer Steven Gilley shot an unarmed suspect named Michael Nida, who had been mistaken for an armed robber, in the back with a submachine gun, killing him. Between 2006 and 2014, almost 5,000 were distributed to local and state law enforcement agencies in Ohio under the surplus military equipment program. Effects A 2017 study found a statistically significant positive relationship between militarization of the police and fatalities from officer-involved shootings. In popular culture The 2015 video game depicts a militarized police, and it depicts both police and criminals wielding military-grade equipment, including rifles, machine guns and grenade launchers. The developer's insistence on "fantasy" while meticulously recreating LA areas and loosely basing crimes in the game on real-life crimes has subsequently been criticized. The documentary , which is about police militarization in the U.S., won the 2015 Documentary Feature Competition Grand Jury award at the . The documentary Do Not Resist by Craig Atkinson is also critical of the phenomenon of police militarization, as exemplified by law enforcement training courses taught by retired military officer , who tells police officers, "You are men and women of violence." The film won the award for "Best Documentary Feature" at the . References Category:Police